tv Meet the Press NBC October 26, 2015 3:00am-4:01am PDT
that house benghazi hearing. on the republican side, the candidates that are struggling are feeling the pressure. here's jeb bush unplugged yesterday. >> i got a lot of really cool things that i can do other than sit around being miserable listening to people demonize me and me feeling compelled to demonize them. that is a joke. elect trump if you want that. >> wow. a lot to dig into there, which we will later in the show. now, not one but two polls show ben carson leading donald trump and all the rest of the republicans in iowa. guess what? we are now just 99 days away from that snowy monday in iowa where we'll find out who wins those caucuses. and carson's under-the-radar rise has bewilder it had smarty pants crowd in iowa. i caught up with carson in iowa and asked him to respond to these comments from donald trump. >> we have a breaking story. donald trump has fallen to
second place behind ben carson. we informed ben, but he was sleeping. [ laughter ] how do you respond to mr. trump? >> everybody has their own personality and if he'd like to do that, that's fine. that's not who i am. and i don't get into the mud pit and i'm not going to be talking about people. i will tell you in terms of energy, i'm not sure that there's anybody else running who's spend 18 or 20 hours intently operating on somebody. >> do you think that people mistake your soft-spokenness with lack of energy. >> i think so. i have plenty of energy. but, you know, i am soft spoken. i do have a tendency to be relaxed. i wasn't always like that. there was a time when i was, you know, very volatile. but i changed.
>> when was that? >> as a teenager. i would go after people with rocks and bricks and baseball bats and hammers and, of course, many people know the story when i was 14 and i tried to stab someone. and, you know, fortunately my life has been changed and i'm a very different person now. >> why do you see so easily go to nazi metaphors? you refer to -- when you were talking about health care you referred ed tred to gestapo. a lot of times, the minute you talk about the nazis and the hall cause, people stop listening. >> interestingly enough, last several weeks i've heard from many people in the jewish community, including rabbis, who've said "you're spot on. you are exactly right." and i think it's -- some of the people in your business, quite frankly, who like to try to stir things up and try to make this into a big horrible thing if i
say something about something that we don't want to become and we never even want to get close to it than i'm comparing it and saying we're there. that's what they do. and, of course, for people who aren't really thinking deeply, you know, that resonates. but the fortunate thing is a lot of people really do think for themselves, as you can see from the poll numbers here. >> you talked about -- you said a lot of jewish people reached out to you about saying you were spot on. so you believe if the jewish citizenry were armed during the '40s that they would have been able to stop the nazis? >> well, look at the whole context in which i've said that and which i've written about it. i wrote about societies before tyranny was able to take root that the tyrants tried to rid the people of the mechanism to defend themselves. so it was set in that context. and i think it's generally agreed that it's much more difficult to dominate people who
are armed than people who are not armed. some people will try to that and make it into a -- an anti-jewish thing, which is foolishness. >> on your position on guns. a little bit of a contradiction. in one article in breitbart you indicated that there shouldn't be a line about what types of weapons. that the second amendment doesn't -- if the government can have an automatic weapon than the citizenry should have the right to buy an automatic weapon. and then at the same time you have said in places where there are a lot of crowds, referring to cities, you don't want a crazy person ending up with the wrong type of weapon. so you seem to be open to limiting that. what is your stand? >> well, my point being we should never compromise the second amendment. it's, therefore, a very, very important reason. and noah webster said that america would never suffer under tyranny because of people with
arms. keep that in mind. of course we should be thinking about what can we do to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of mentally unstable people. the two things are not incompatible. >> so you're not saying there should be a limitation on what type of weapon a sane person should be able to buy. >> of course not. when we put these -- when we put this amendment in place, state-of-the-art weapon was, what, a musket? but the principle was that the citizenry should have access to whatever they needed in order to protect themselves from an overly aggressive government. >> what's the line? should somebody be able to have one of these surface-to-air missiles? >> i don't think you can get a surface-to-air missile legally in this country. >> and that's okay? that's my point. you're okay with having anything that you can hold -- there is some limitation on what somebody -- >> there is. and we have laws that take care of that. >> does life begin at
conception? >> i believe it does. >> does that mean -- who's right should be superseded? the mother or the unborn child? who has greater rights? >> this the ideal situation the mother should not believe that the baby is her enemy. and should not be looking to terminate the baby. you know, things are set up in such a way that the person in the world who's the greatest interest in protecting the baby is the mother. we've allowed the purveyors of the vision to make mothers think that that baby is their enemy and that they have a right to kill it. can you see how perverted that line of thinking is? >> what if somebody has an unwanted pregnancy? should they have the right to terminate it? >> no. think about this.
during slavery -- and i know that's one of those words you're not supposed to say, but i'm saying it -- during slavery a lot of the slave owners thought they had the right to do whatever they wanted to that slave. anything that they chose to do. and what if the abolitionists had said "you know, i don't believe in slavery, i think it's wrong but you guys do whatever you want to do"? where would we be? >> definitively, do you want to see roe v. wade wade overturned? >> ultimately, i would want to see it overturned. >> does that mean all abortions illegal or there an exception you would have? >> i'm a reasonable person and if people can come up with a reasonable explanation of why they would like to kill a baby, i'll listen. >> life and health of the mother? >> again, that's an extraordinarily rare situation.
but if in that very rare situation occurred there's room to discuss that. >> rape and incest? >> rape and insist i would not be in favor of killing a baby because the baby came about in that way. and all you have to do is go and look at the many stories of people who have led very useful lives who were the result of rape or incest. >> i want to move to health care. you have, i think a lot of people don't realize, you believe we should get rid of medicare and replace it with sort of a from birth to death plan where you would -- the government would give you $2,000 a year. explain how you would -- i may have misinterpreted it. >> not correct. >> explain how you would replace medicare. >> first of all, what i have said is that the system that i would put in place would largely negate the need for medicare or for medicaid. so i'm not talking about getting rid of those programs.
and the way that i generally see things, entitlement programs, et cetera, is we create a mechanism that allows people to ascend the ladder of success to the extent that they don't need those programs anymore. that's what i'm talking about. now, people will always try to reinterpret that to say carson wants to get rid of that, he wants to get rid of, that he wants to leave all these people in a terrible situation. that's propaganda. >> so how do you -- how do you implement this? >> the way you do it is we make health savings accounts available to people from the day that they are born to the day that they die at which time they can pass it on to their family. we pay for it with the same traditional dollars that we pay for health care with. recognize that in america we spend twice as much per capita on health care as many other countries and yet we have these horrible access problems. so we have adequate resources, we just don't use them in an efficient way. and then we give people the
ability to shift money within their health savings account within their family. if you're $500 short, your wife can give it to you out of hers or your daughter or uncle or cousin. it gives you enormous flexibility without a middleman. >> so you would eliminate health insurance companies? >> i'm not finished. that will take careover the largest number of incidents that are likely to occur. it doesn't take care of catastrophic health care, but you can buy catastrophic health care policy and it will cost you a lot less because the vast majority of things are coming out of your hsa. so the only thing coming out of your catastrophic insurance is catastrophic health care. it's like having a homeowners policy with a big deductible for a homeowners policy where you want every scratch covered. completely different animals. >> but you are advocating for the government to spend this money and just allocate in the a different way? >> well, yeah, the money from the medicaid is going to take care of those health savings accounts, yes.
>> final question. you would not -- i'm guessing you would not hire somebody to be a doctor if they didn't have experience in the medical field. what do you say to folks that say "why should we hire you as president when you have no experience in government or the political field?" >> i would say that there are a lot of people who like to believe that whatever they do is the end all and that nobody could absolutely do things better than they could. it's sort of like the constitution, people say "what are you doing talk about the constitution? you're not a constitutional lawyer." well, the constitution was written at an eighth grade level for a reason. they wanted the people to be able to understand how they were being governed. and our government was set up for citizen statesmen, not career politicians. and, you know, common sense is a lot more valuable than many years in the political arena. witness the fact that in
congress we have 8700 years of political experience. where has that gotten us? and i think people are willing to open their eyes and say let's talk about common sense. now, that doesn't mean that if someone like me were to get in that we wouldn't have plenty of people around us who were well seasoned in what was going on in washington and in various parts of the world. >> so you're going-to-surround yourself with experienced people, is what you're saying? >> i think you have to do that. soloman, the wisest man who ever lived said in proverbs11:14 "in a multitude of counselors is safe safety. ". >> you can see my complete interview with ben carson unedited. we talked about syria, the debt ceiling and other issues. coming up, remember this scene from thursday's benghazi hearings. >> even their names? you want that? you want that released? >> let me tell you something,
right now -- >> the only one you've asked for is sidney blumenthal. is sidney blumenthal. >> the top two memb bei was organized.a, i was on the go. i was a doer. then the chronic, widespread pain drained my energy. my doctor and i agreed moving more helps ease fibromyalgia pain. she also prescribed lyrica. fibromyalgia is thought to be the result of overactive nerves. lyrica is believed to calm these nerves. for some patients, lyrica significantly relieves fibromyalgia pain and improves physical function. with less pain, i feel better and can be more active. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions
or suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worsening depression or unusual changes in mood or behavior. or swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling or blurry vision. common side effects are dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain and swelling of hands, legs and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who have had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. fibromyalgia may have changed things but with less pain, i'm still a doer. ask your doctor about lyrica today. lyrica, move forward with less fibromyalgia pain.
. welcome back. it's not hard to find democrats who think republicans who are out of the mainstream or republicans who think it's democrats that are out of the mainstream of american opinion. so which party really is in the mainstream? in our latest nbc news "wall street journal" poll we asked americans which political party is in the maybe stream on these six issues. gay marriage, abortion, climate change, fiscal issues, immigration and guns. not surprisingly, democratic primary voters believe they're in the mainstream on all six of those issues from gay marriage down to guns and republican primary voters believe they're in the mainstream in all six issues. somebody these be wrong here, right? who do we go to figure this snout independents. and there's good news if you're the w among independents in our poll, they believe the democratic party is in the mainstream on three of the six issues, gay marriage, abortion, and climate change. on the issue of guns they believe the republicans are in the mainstream. the only issue they say the republicans are in the mainstream. by the way, on the two big fiscal issues here, immigration and economic issues overall,
independents believe both parties are more out of the mainstream. so what are we to conclude? number one, independent voters tend to reflect the total electorate better than either party but this is one what it's going to mean a year from now. in october, three or four weeks before election day it means republicans will use the gun issue as a wedge in these swing state, think colorado, iowa, and virginia. and democrats will use the issues of marriage, abortion and climate change as wedge issues in other parts of those same swing state, probably the suburbs. you saw it in '12, you'll see in the '16. you won't see either party arguing about the two issues both are out of the mainstream on. coming up, where do we go from here on th and can you explain why you recommend synthetic over cedar? "super food?" is that a real thing? it's a great school, but is it the right one for her? is this really any better than the one you got last year? if we consolidate suppliers, what's the savings there? so should we go with the 467 horsepower? ...or is a 423 enough? good question. you ask a lot of good questions...
i think we should move you into our new fund. sure... ok. but are you asking enough about how your wealth is managed? wealth management at charles schwab. ♪ 800,000 hours of supercomputing time, 3 million lines of code, 40,000 sets of eyes, or a million sleepless nights. whether it's building the world's most advanced satellite, the space station, or the next leap in unmanned systems. at boeing, one thing never changes. our passion to make it real. ♪ our passion to make it real. when you're not confident your company's data is secure, the possibility of a breach can quickly become the only thing you think about.
that's where at&t can help. at at&t we monitor our network traffic so we can see things others can't. mitigating risks across your business. leaving you free to focus on what matters most. nobody's hurt,but there will you totstill be pain.new car. it comes when your insurance company says they'll only pay three-quarters of what it takes to replace it. what are you supposed to do, drive three-quarters of a car? now if you had liberty mutual new car replacement, you'd get your whole car back. i guess they don't want you driving around on three wheels. smart. with liberty mutual new car replacement, we'll replace the full value of your car. see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance.
for months, many republicans looked to hillary clinton's testify before the house benghazi committee as the moment where she would be exposed for failing to protect american lives and frankly, potentially even lying about it. more recently, many democrats looked to the hearings with similar anticipation, hoping this would be the day clinton came off as the adult in the room and exposed the committee as a partisan charade. judging by these headlines from
the "washington post," "time" and politico, it looks like perhaps the democrats got their way -- at least on the pr front. joining me now this morning are the chairman of the house select committee on benghazi, republican trey gowdy of south carolina and the ranking democrat on the committee, elijah cummings of maryland. congressman cummings, we'll get to you in a moment. we'll start with chairman gowdy. chairman, good morning, sir. >> good morning to you and to mr. cummings. >> let me start with playing a clip of something you were asked on thursday evening after the hearing. here it is. >> well, when you say "new today," we knew some of that already. we knew about the e-mails. in terms of her testimony, i don't know that she testified that much differently today than she had previous times she's testified so i'd have to go back and look at the transcript. >> all right, simple question, you've looked at the transcript i imagine the last 72 hours. what have you come up with? >> well, i think there's some new information and some clarifying information in all
three trunbenghazi information. the first is the before when she's asked whether she takes responsibility, she says yes but when you ask responsibility for what, i can't tell you what she's taking responsibility for and my main fear is how are we better prepared to avoid the next benghazi if we don't fully understand who made the errors and where the errors were made last time. so with respect to responsibility, with the placing of the mission, with the request for more security i have a perspective which is rooted in the previous arb that the secretary of state, himself or herself, should do that personal review. her position is that there are people and processes in place and she relies on security experts. we have to get that reconciled because i think mr. cummings and i both agree the penultimate objective is to avoid the next benghazi. >> we did a little calculation here on the number of words that
you used during the hearing. you said the word "benghazi" 17 times. blumenthal 35 times. e-mails 76 times. you made a promise that you were keeping the focus on benghazi. do you feel as if you did as much or -- even some republicans were wondering why you were going down the sidney blumenthal -- what some called the rabbit hole. >> >> i don't think it's a rabbit hole, chuck and i'll tell you why. i respect that other people have different perspectives but to me those are not sidney blumenthal's e-mails they are secretary clinton's e-mails to or from sidney blumenthal and every one of them relates to libya and benghazi so i'm not reading blumenthal e-mails about bridesmaids dresses or wedding plans or yoga. these are all about libya and benghazi and to the extent that he was one of the more prolific e-mailers to her on the subject matter how do you not ask how does this person who has no formal role in government and no
expertise in libya or benghazi, how does he have unfettered access to you but the ambassador -- there is not a single e-mail to or from him. so i get people want to refer to these as sidney blumenthal e-mails. they're hillary clinton e-mails that she received from him and, frankly, i think it would be a dereliction of duty if you didn't ask about them. >> nobody is questioning whether to ask about them. i think it was the amount of time spent on it. it seemed like a larger portion of time was spent on that. for instance, i didn't hear as many questions that i expected to hear on the libya policy in general, the vacuum that was left that ultimately created the security situation we had in benghazi that led to the death of four americans. >> i think peter roskam and mike pompeo both asked, maybe all of their series of questions on the ticktock memo and i remember susan brooks having a stack of e-mails in 2011 versus 2012 and 2011 there was a heightened interest in libya and benghazi and 2012 it appeared to
dissipate, at least according to the e-mails. so chuck as you know, when grow into hearings each of the seven members has his or her own lane. that's what they'll ask on and i think it's relevant on two different levels. whether or not his e-mails were solicited or unsolicited you can argue is irrelevant. but she said they were unsolicited and i do think credibility is always relevant. if they were truly unsolicited then she wouldn't v changed her testimony on thursday. >> let me ask you this. you said this the other night on fox with greta van susteren "part of what i saw wasn't that constructive and for the american people to see a nine hour food fight, i would rather do that privately." it sounds like you may regret how you went about questioning secretary clinton that maybe you should have done some of it off
camera and only some on camera. what do-over do you want? >> chuck, it was a voluntary interview. i didn't send a subpoena to secretary clinton, it was a voluntary interview and she wanted it to be in public. i wrote a letter several months ago giving her an option and she chose public and that's well within her rights. i can just tell you of the 50 some odd interviews we have done thus far, the vast majority have been private and you don't see the bickering among the members of congress in private interviews. you don't see any of that. >> the tv camera ads to the grandstanding on both sides of the aisle? >> what do you think, chuck? you've been following congress for a long time. i can just tell you in the private interviews there is never any of what you saw thursday. it is one hour on the republican side, one hour on the democrat side which is why you're going to see the next two dozen interviews done privately
because it is -- look at the other investigations that are being done right now. the lois learner investigation that was just announced, was that public or private? how about comey's investigation? is that public or private? the private ones produce better results. >> very quickly, secretary clinton, was she a cooperative witness? >> she answered the questions. i don't think i ever caught her off. she was given ample opportunity, so she answered the questions, yeah, if that's your definition of "cooperative," yes. >> is that yours? >> i've always also injected an element of wholeness and completeness and truthfulness in the definition of cooperative and i'll give you one example. i gave her an opportunity to tell me where the 90% to 95% figure comes from. she's wrong about that. did she cooperate in answering the question? yes. was it an accurate answer?
no. >> congressman gowdy, i'll leave it there. let me bring in the ranking democrat on the benghazi committee, elijah cummings. congressman cummings, welcome back to "meet the press." >> good to be with you. >> let me start with you, the one issue democrats and how they handled themselves. we tallied up 68 questions to secretary clinton. 16 at best could we call challenging. why did you guys choose a strategy of shield rather than a strategy of what tammy duckworth did, probably the one democrat that did it the most, of conducting a hearing, asking questions about the security situation. >> from the very beginning, chuck, i said we were looking for the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in many instance wes found ourselves having to not defend secretary clinton but make sure the report wasb
glad the public had an opportunity to see all of that. when you look at what we were asking about, they were the things that went to benghazi, the things that we were supposed to be dealing with very from the very beginning. and when the families came in, many of them with tears in their eyes, they asked us to do three things -- one, they asked us to make sure that we made sure it did not happen again, they wanted us to look for the facts, more facts than we already had and they asked for one final thing, they asked us to make sure that we don't turn this into a political football. so all we were trying to do is make sure that we defended the truth. >> well, there was one new fact, i think, that a lot of people e& the characterization of the attack itself. there's always been this controversy that the white house was conflating the video issues that took place versus what happened in benghazi that night.
one of the e-mails that was turned up was an e-mail secretary clinton sent, i'll put it up here, to our daughter chelsea clinton who, by the way, used the pseudonym diane reynolds in her e-mails and on september 11, that night, secretary clinton classified it as a terrorist attack by an al qaeda-like group. three days later, secretary clinton said this "we've seen the heavy assault on our post in benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. we've seen rage and violence directed at american embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing do with. >> did that trouble you that there were two stories here and does that deserve an extra line of inquiry? >> no, not at all. as a matter of fact, i thought the secretary explained it very well. remember what she said during the hearing -- and she said this over and over again -- that on
the night of the incident, ansar al sharia said that they had committed this offense so when she was writing a note to her daughter, e-mailing her daughter and making those statements, that was one thing. and by the way they were getting intelligence from a lot of folks and that -- some of it said it was with regard to the video. others said it was an attack. so therefore the information was fluid and the information that she got even from the intelligence community was a little bit mixed so she basically -- she was basically talking about what she knew at those moments and i have to tell you, chuck, one of the things that we have to give her credit for is when she was turning over her e-mails that e-mail to her daughter, you could have easily considered that personal but because she mentioned the attacks, she included that in
the stacks of e-mails she turned over to the committee, and that goes to show you she was trying to do the right thing. >> there was there's been talk that you and the rest of the democrats might resign from the committee. where are you on that this morning? >> we have decided to stay on the committee because somebody has to be in the room to defend the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth and if you think about it, if you listen to the questions being asked by the republicans and the way they tried to attack her you really did need to have democrats in the room to give the other side of the story not so much to defend her but to try to make sure the complete picture was painted. one of the things i have that asked chairman gowdy to do is release all the transcripts with appropriate redactions for sensitivity because i want the public to actually see what's in these transcripts because i believe once they see what's in the transcripts they will have a
pretty good idea of what this is all about and it will verify what congressman mccarthy said, it will verify what congressman hanna said and the self-described republican conservative employee, what he said. >> very quickly, are you running for the u.s. senate in maryland? >> i'm going to meet with my family and we'll make that decision. when i'm not even in the race, by the way, and i'm leading by 13 points, it does give me an idea of how i will do so we'll figure that out. but i didn't want this to have anything to do with politics and i said i would wait until benghazi was over. hopefully it will be over and i'm hoping chairman gowdy will give us a date certain to end this. we've now spent close to $5 million on this. >> congressman cummings, let the record show you are paying attention to your polling in a thrace race that you're not yet in. >> oh, yeah, you gotta do that. >> congressman comings, thanks for coming on "meet the press." when we come back, who's
laughing now? the ten days that some may believe just handed the democratic nomination to hillary clinton. so what's your news? i got a job! i'll be programming at ge. oh i got a job too, at zazzies. (friends gasp) the app where you put fruit hats on animals? i love that! guys, i'll be writing code that helps machines communicate. (interrupting) i just zazzied you. (phone vibrates) look at it! (friends giggle) i can do dogs, hamsters, guinea pigs... you name it. i'm going to transform the way the world works. (proudly) i programmed that hat. and i can do casaba melons. i'll be helping turbines power cities. i put a turbine on a cat. (friends ooh and ahh) i can make hospitals run more efficiently... this isn't a competition! more "sit" per roll. more "stay" per roll. more "who's training who" per roll. bounty is two times more absorbent.
so one roll of bounty can last longer than those bargain brands. so you get more "life" per roll. bounty. the long-lasting quicker picker upper. hi watson. annabelle, your birthday is tomorrow. i'm turning seven. what did you ask for? a princess. and a pony. you like things that begin with p. i like pink frosting too. will you have a cake? yeah. i was too sick to have one last year. the data your doctor shared shows you are healthy. are you a doctor? no. i help doctors identify cancer treatments. i want to be a doctor someday. i can help with that too. watson, i like you. the artificial heart, this ielectric guitarsdoers, and rockets to the moon. it's the story of america- land of the doers. doin' it. did it. done. doers built this country. the dams and the railroads. ♪john henry was a steel drivin' man♪ hmm, catchy. they built the golden gates and the empire states. and all this doin' takes energy -no matter who's doin'.
it would be hard to imagine a campaign stretch that could have gone better for hillary clinton. a debate win, joe biden deciding not to run and clinton coming out on the other side of the benghazi hearings looking politically a lot better than the republican committee members. substance is another story perhaps for the general election debate. at the very least, clinton won by not losing, a capstone tone-to-a ten-day period during which she tightened her grip on the democratic nomination. >> did any of you see our debate in las vegas? [ cheers and applause ] >> last night a victory lap. capping 10 pivotal days. if hillary clinton wins the democratic nomination -- >> will you all caucus for me on february 1? >> -- october will go down as the month she secured it. >> it's been quite a week, hasn't it? >> in september, clinton was licking her wounds, leading bernie sanders in national polls by just seven points, forced on to tv to explain the growing
storm over her e-mails. >> you know how much i love being interviewed. >> what a difference a month makes. from october 13 when clinton quieted democratic nerves at the first debate with an assist from senator bernie sanders. >> the american people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn e-mails. >> to 201 when vice president je biden bowed out of the race. >> i believe we're out of time. >> ending 82 days about speculations of his old presidential ambitions. >> we're old friends. >> if i know joe, he'll be right be there with us on the front lines. >> to october 22, when clinton survived an 11-hour hearing largely unscathed. >> i'm sorry that it doesn't fit your narrative congressman. i can only tell you what the facts were. >> a string of successes has her sueded democrats she's worth rallying behind. at that benghazi hearing, clinton was good, not great, but her opponents made her look polished and presidential by comparison. >> i can pause while you're
reading your notes from your staff. >> i'm happy to bring breakfast in but when we ask a yes or no question it would be helpful if we could get to the answer. >> on friday, the nation's largest public employee union endorsed clinton. progressive be blogger marcos moulitsas tweeted "hillary clinton was meh with the activist left. thanks gop for changing that." >> i had a rough thursday. [ laughter ] >> as clinton was testifying, fbi director james comey was answering questions in the building next door about the ongoing investigation into her use of a private server. >> i'm confident we have the people and the resources to do it in the way i believe we do all our work, which is promptly, professionally and independently. >> but clinton has comforted democrats who needed persuading that their front-runner is determined to win. back in a moment with the growing uncertainty in the republican race. wait until you hear what jeb bush said about all the cool things he'd rather be doing than
things he'd rather be doing than running for president in t when you're not confident your company's data is secure, the possibility of a breach can quickly become the only thing you think about. that's where at&t can help. at at&t we monitor our network traffic so we can see things others can't. mitigating risks across your business. leaving you free to focus on what matters most. ♪jake reese, "day to feel alive"♪ ♪jake reese, "day to feel alive"♪ ♪jake reese, "day to feel alive"♪
want bladder leak underwear that try always discreet underwear and move, groove, wiggle, giggle, swerve, curve. lift, shift, ride, glide, hit your stride. only always discreet underwear has soft dual leak guard barriers to help stop leaks where they happen most and a discreet fit that hugs your curves, you barely feel it. always discreet underwear so bladder leaks can feel like no big deal. because hey, pee happens. get your free pair and valuable coupons at always discreet.com
we are back, let's bring on w panel. john will be co-moderating the republican debate. doris kearns goodwin is starting her trump biography. [ laughter ] jennifer rubin who writes the right turn column for the "washington post" and steven henderson of the "detroit free press." you are here to represent the
entire outside-the-belt way. [ laughter ] i want to start with a remarkable moment from jeb bush. let's see this whole thing again. >> if this election is about how we're going to fight to get nothing done i don't want to -- i don't want any part of it. i don't want to be elected president to sit around and see gridlock become so dominant that people literally are in decline in their lives. that is not my motivation. i've got a lot of really cool things that i could do other than sit around being miserable listening to people demonize me and me feeling compelled to demonize them. that is a joke. elect trump if you want that. >> doris? >> whoa. >> yeah. >> i mean, compare that with how mccain handled himself in a similar situation in '07. he was cutting staff, as mr. bush has, his poll numbers has gone down, he was in a bad place and he said "it's how you face a challenge politically and physically that determines your character and your courage." and he said "i'm going on a bus, i'm going to be lean and mean." and he said "i'm going out among the people."
and eventually mac was back. you have to take these moments of adversity and show strength and courage and forward optimism. you can't blame the process. you're it. you're in it. >> john, every presidential president has that near-death political experience, this is jeb's. >> right, he hopes it's a near-death experience. [ laughter ] >> fair enough. >> he set out on this race saying he was going to run if he could do it with joy in his heart. that was an upset candidate right there who doesn't understand what is happening in the race. i think his whole family is a little taken aback by what is this republican party? what's happening here? he's raised so much money and i think he's going to have to figure out a way. his staff says the cutbacks he did were a way of adjusting to reality, becoming a new jeb bush campaign. we'll see if he can pull it off. >> i want to play for you the first ad ben carson put up this week and then show you jeb
bush's -- the first ad, that super pac, one of the early ads the super pac put up. it's two different takes on this year. take a look. >> washington is broken. the political class broke it. together we can drain the swamp and protect our children's future. >> pretty obvious that message. here's right to rise, the jeb bush super pac intro ad for jeb. >> if he didn't like a project, it was going to be vetoed. >> it didn't matter if you were republican, it didn't matter if you were his best friend. >> he said "this is where we're going, this is how we're going to reform state government." >> every politician comes in talking about making change and generally there's not much change but governor bush made a lot of changes. >> he got the nickname "veto corleone." >> ben carson has read the poll numbers this year. i don't know if jeb bush's team has. >> what strikes me is not only the outsider insider, but how backward looking jeb bush's ad was. he's talking about what he's
done. his family has an esteemed record, one of the great political families of our era, and it's not enough this time. i'm also struck in that opening s.e.c.ment how small he seems, how petty, how put upon. you have to rise above this. the presidency is about being bigger than life, not smaller. about being optimistic. i think he is so befuddled and unhappy with this race that the worst elements in him rather than the best elements are coming forward. >> steven, i think the last time we were on jeb bush had been in detroit, introducing himself. you saw him in march. what do you see now? >> we have starting to look at fund-raising numbers for both bush and carson. carson leads republicans in michigan. leads bush dramatically but what's more interesting is how. he's leading with small contributions in large numbers throughout the state. people in tupper peninsula of michigan are giving to the carson campaign. bush's support is concentrated in wealthy suburbs of detroit,
grand rapids. >> very obvious places. >> he's got institutional support. the trick is neither can win with that strategy alone. they have to blend the two. jeb bush has to connect with individual voters better, carson has to get more institutional support. who know whas what we'll see by march. >> we have to bring in donald trump because jeb bush is rattled by what's going on. so is donald trump. he's losing in two polls and the sky is falling apparently. first he attacked the pollsters. it was a bloomberg/"des moines register" poll. listen to what trump said on saturday attacking the pollsters. >> i'm number two in iowa! i said i don't believe it. one's bloomberg, they hate me. the other one is a super liberal newspaper, the "des moines register," which is third rate, totally third rate, not respected in iowa. it's a third rate crummy newspaper so i have these two polls, bloomberg hates me, don't forget, michael did want to run for president.
remember that. >> the same poll used to have trump ahead. but then he decided to take aim at ben carson. >> i'm presbyterian, can you believe it? nobody believes i'm presbyterian. i'm presbyterian. i'm presbyterian. boy, that's down the middle of the road, folks, in all fairness. i mean, seventh day adventist, i don't know about. >> even more -- he took this little shot, doris, on the sabbath for people that are seventh day adventists, adding insult to injury. >> i think the same thing we were saying about jeb bush is now important for mr. trump. he's in a moment of adversity, how do you handle it? the wonderful thing adlai st stevenson said the challenge is not how to win an election but how do you win without proving herself unworthy to win. these kind of comments are not
going to hurt just the process, they'll hurt him and the general election. he has to figure out, he's in trouble and even if it's not big trouble, he can rise above it. that's what he haas to do. you can't just give into it again. >> this stuff hasn't hurt him yet, john. >> no, it hasn't. but i think the question''ve had about trump is long is he going to stay in this race sand he only going to stay in it as long as he feels really good? if he loses a caucus or primary is that going to be the moment where he says "i've had enough of this"? it's unusual at a time when he's still leading national polls, still leading in new hampshire, still leading in south carolina he would be so unnerved by simply falling behind in a poll in iowa. so it has to raise questions about how long he wants to do this. >> jennifer, it's not surprising that he's losing in iowa. trump shouldn't win, but trump could be the nominee, mike huckabee and rick santorum won it and they weren't nominees. what is he complaining about? >> his entire shtick is built
around his invincibility, everybody in government is stupid, he's the only smart person. so as soon as he's not winning everywhere then his aura of invincibility, the thing that drives him to be a winner, to be the alpha dog is destroyed so there is a real question, i think, john, i think you're right, whether he'll stay in this if he isn't leading wherever in every poll. that's an expectation game that no one can possible match. >> i want to defend the "des moines register." [ laughter ] >> one of the midwest's greatest newspapers. >> i suspect donald trump thought it was a better newspaper when he was leading in the polls. >> no doubt. stephen, for what it's worth, donald trump refused to apologize for the knock on dr. carson and his religion because he's never apologized for those things. >> right. i think this is the scary part of this campaign, this sort of strain of really awful divisiveness. much of it cloaked in religious terms that we've heard during this campaign and that's not -- that's not american. it's not the thing that i think
will get someone the nomination but it's playing for some reason among the electorate. >> it's interesting, john harwood, if you read today's op-ed page in the "new york times" you were told the front-runner might be marco rubio. that's a person we didn't talk about at all. do you buy that very snars. >> you could make that argument. it will probably come down to an outsider candidate and an establishment candidate and the establishment candidate is likely to win in the end once a one on one matchup occurs. who's best position to claim that? maybe marco rubio. >> it's always been maybe with him. always a lot of maybes. we'll see. when we come back, we'll talk more about the democratic side of the aisle. quick reminder here, a little plug for john. the republican debate in bolder, colorado, will air on cnbc on wednesday. the undercard is at 6:00. the big main event is at 8:00 eastern. mtp daily will be out there in bolder life as well. back in just 45 seconds with our end game segment.
did mitt romney really mean to say obamacare was a good thing after all? - good journalism is about telling a story from more than one perspective. embracing diversity can enrich your story by allowing you to see things from more than just one point of view. that's a story worth telling. the more you know.
time for end game. the panel is back. last night was a big democratic event in iowa. the j.j. dinner. bernie sanders is now going after hillary clinton more directly than ever has before. take a look. >> some are trying to rewrite history by saying they voted for one anti-gay law to stop something worse. that that's not the case. the transpacific partnership. [ boos ] . that agreement is not now nor has it ever been the gold
standard of trade agreements. i listened carefully to what bush and dick cheney and rumsfeld had to say and i said no, they're not telling the truth. [ cheers and applause ] >> stephen, he ticked it off there, iraq war vote, defense of marriage act, tpp. hello clintons? >> where was this guy during the debate? that's what we wanted to hear him say during the democratic debate and he didn't step down. some of this is about bernie sanders trying to change the internal dynamics in the party rather than hurt hillary clinton's chances in the national election. speaking to j.j., he's all other her, on a national stage, he's way more conciliatory. >> what do you think of sfwherz is he mccarthy or barack obama? >> when you saw him at the jeff jack coming with marchers behind
the thing as if he was in an outside movement. his greatest strength is to say change comes to america when the outside and inside come together and i'm bringing these people from the outside. it's the way the abolitionistsed, the way the women's movement worked, the gay movement. he's trying to say that's the only way washington will change is from the outside. and there's a strength in that but inside you have to make something happen. i think the interesting thing in watching him last night was that you have to decide after that debate what happens to you internally. he's decided to become more of a fighter. hillary on the other hand will have that confidence more important than the polls, more important than the money she's getting. she can wake up in the morning now and i feel "i've done something" and maybe that whole sense of entitlement she had at the beginning where people thought she's just dynastic. by having a rough patch as she did for so long, she looks like the new fighter. it's a good narrative for her campaign. >> jennifer, do republican primary voters change their thinking the stronger she looks?
>> i think so. that's one of the reasons marco rubio is looking better. they are not going to be able to. no nate just anyone. they have to have someone who's articulate, who knows something about the issues, chris christie likes to say "i can prosecute the case against her." i think that has new resonance after we saw them not prosecute very well at the hearing. so i think republican voters as they get closer to the first elections are going say who can we envision on that stage against hillary? it will be hillary and it won't be a weak hillary. >> so some people think if it goes to cleveland it could be mitt romney. [ laughter ] let me tell you what mitt romney said about health care. he was quoted, let me read you something here. he was quoted in an obituary for the founder of staples, tom stemberg, and he was quoted in the obituary as saying this. "without tom pushing it" referring to health care in general, getting more people health care. "i don't think we would have romney care and without romney
care i don't think we have obamacare. without tom, a lot of people would haven't health insurance." so that sounds like an endorse. >> he's back to the original position. >> this is what romney wrote "getting people health insurance is a good thing and that's what tom stemberg fought for. i oppose obamacare and believe it failed. it took insurance away from people who were promised otherwise and usurp ed state plans." >> he was not comfortable being himself, owning up to who he was, what he had done. that did not go over well at all. >> and yet he's -- it's almost -- he's still worried about his own politics. >> he's not running for anything. >> well -- >> are you sure? >> yet. >> i'm sure. >> okay. that's all we have for today. we'll be back next week with mitt romney's announcement -- no,ú$8xr i'm kidding. we'll be back next week. if it's sunday, it's "meet the press."
it's monday, october 26th. coming up on "early today," breaking news overnight. at least five are dead after a whale watching boat with 27 passengers sinks. the woman behind the wheel of a crash at the ososu homecoming. four killed and dozens injured. then to mother nature and a beating that texas has taken from patricia and torrential rains. plus joe biden reveals the real reason why he didn't want to run for president. katy perry throes her popularity behind hillary clinton. how much do you think americans earn? we'll tell you. "early today" starts you. a massive search and rescue